GenFlick

List saved human delivery approvals for one selected CRM destination and source advertiser

native.genads_crm_reviews

DestructiveIdempotent

List saved human delivery approvals for one selected CRM destination and source advertiser. Returns reviewed mappings and record identifiers, never contact answers. Use nextCursor to read more approvals.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "work_id": "<work_id>",
      "arguments": "<arguments>",
      "expected_catalog_version": "<expected_catalog_version>",
      "read_skills": "<read_skills>",
      "request_key": "<request_key>"
    },
    "name": "native.genads_crm_reviews"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`work_id`	Yes
`arguments`	Yes
`read_skills`	Yes	Exact required native skills and their dependencies, copied from the accepted session bootstrap's skills array. Include only entries in that array. General mcp.* guides and native.{studio}.instructions are guidance, not native skill proofs.
`request_key`	Yes
`publication_proposal_id`	No	For native Social scheduling, the exact server-approved publication proposal. This identifier cannot confer approval by itself.
`expected_catalog_version`	Yes	For a new session, read a studios/{studio}/native/{pack} child toolset and copy invocation.catalog_version from a native tool descriptor. Do not use the top-level library version. For calls in an existing session, use that session proposal's catalog_version.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, but the description presents a plain listing operation with no mention of side effects, what could be destroyed, or permission requirements. It does add useful scoping ('never contact answers' clarifies the return payload), but against destructive annotations the omission of mutation behavior is a real gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences with the scope front-loaded and no filler; the output-content clarification is well placed. The pagination sentence, though brief, introduces an incorrect parameter name, which costs it a point.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need no prose, and the description correctly caps what is returned. However, for a tool with a required invocation envelope (work_id, read_skills, expected_catalog_version, request_key) and destructive annotations, the description leaves the agent without guidance on either the envelope or the side effects.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 50% schema coverage and six parameters (including a nested arguments object with connection_id, account_id and after), the description should compensate but does not. Worse, it tells the agent to use 'nextCursor' while the actual pagination parameter is named 'after', which is actively misleading, and it never explains work_id, read_skills, expected_catalog_version, or request_key.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('List saved human delivery approvals') and scopes it to 'one selected CRM destination and source advertiser', which is concrete enough to distinguish it from siblings like native.genads_crm_review or native.genads_crm_connections. It stops short of naming any sibling explicitly, so differentiation still requires inference from names alone.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no statement of when to call this versus native.genads_crm_review, native.genads_crm_request, or native.genads_crm_connections, nor any prerequisite (e.g. that a CRM connection must exist). The only usage-like sentence is a pagination hint that refers to 'nextCursor', a name that does not exist in the schema.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All GenFlick tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?